Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2018 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (2) TMI 1449 - HC - Service TaxRefund of unutilized CENVAT credit - input services - N/N. 17/2009- ST dated 07.07.2009 (as superseded by N/N. 52/2011-ST dated 30.12.2011) - Whether the CESTAT was right in not considering all the grounds of appeal raised before the appeal filed before it and passing order without considering them? Held that - We do not think how a factual conspectus, based on which the remand was directed, can be taken as a precedent for the purpose of the present case. Even otherwise, all the judgments and particularly rendered by the Hon ble Supreme Court have been duly noted and considered by this court. The tribunal s order is not vitiated by any error of law - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
Issues:
1. Entitlement for refund of Cenvat Credit on taxable input services under specific notifications. 2. Consideration of all grounds of appeal by CESTAT before passing orders. Analysis: 1. The appeal before the Bombay High Court concerned the entitlement of the assessee for a refund of Cenvat Credit on taxable input services utilized for export business. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) had allowed the refund claims, stating that the respondent-assessee, engaged in the export of goods, was entitled to avail of Cenvat Credit for various services used in making the goods exportable. The tribunal held that services like banking, financial, technical inspection, and certification were directly related to the export of goods, enabling the assessee to claim Cenvat Credit on these services. The tribunal's decision was supported by a previous judgment of the Bombay High Court in a similar case. The High Court, after considering the tribunal's order and relevant judgments, found no substantial question of law requiring its consideration and upheld the tribunal's decision. 2. The appellant raised concerns about the CESTAT not considering all the grounds of appeal before passing its order. The High Court highlighted a case where the matter was remanded for verification of the admissibility of credit before granting a refund. However, the High Court clarified that the factual scenario leading to the remand in that case could not be considered a precedent for the present case. The High Court emphasized that it had duly considered all relevant judgments, including those of the Supreme Court, and found no error of law or perversity in the tribunal's decision. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, stating that no substantial question of law arose from the tribunal's orders. In conclusion, the Bombay High Court upheld the CESTAT's decision, affirming the entitlement of the assessee for a refund of Cenvat Credit on specific input services related to export activities. The court found no grounds to question the tribunal's ruling and dismissed the appeal, emphasizing the absence of any substantial legal issues necessitating its intervention.
|